pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.19439 · v1 · pith:FRHAOBFGnew · submitted 2026-05-19 · 🪐 quant-ph

Enhancing ultracold atomic batteries using tunable interactions

Duc Tuan Hoang , Thomas Busch , Thom\'as Fogarty This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 06:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum batterymany-body effectsultracold atomsresonanceenergy transferinteractionsergotropy
0
0 comments X

The pith

By tuning the charger frequency to resonance, a many-body bosonic quantum battery reaches perfect energy transfer and maximum extractable work.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper studies the charging dynamics of a one-dimensional many-body bosonic quantum battery coupled to a harmonic-oscillator charger. It shows that adjusting the charger frequency to a resonance condition produces complete energy transfer and the largest possible extractable work. In the weak-coupling limit an effective two-level model reproduces the maximum stored work, ergotropy, and optimal charging time. Many-body batteries deliver higher charging power and shorter quantum speed limit times than single-particle versions. Attractive intra-species interactions improve overall performance and create extra resonances, while repulsive interactions reduce performance.

Core claim

The authors establish that tuning the charger frequency to resonance produces perfect energy transfer and maximal ergotropy in the many-body battery. Within the weak-coupling regime this outcome is captured by an effective two-level model that correctly forecasts the peak stored work, ergotropy, and shortest charging time. Many-body systems exhibit greater charging power and reduced quantum speed limit times, while both attractive and repulsive intra-species interactions generate additional resonances, with attraction enhancing and repulsion suppressing the charging metrics.

What carries the argument

Resonance condition obtained by tuning the charger frequency, captured in the weak-coupling limit by an effective two-level model of the battery-charger system.

If this is right

  • Many-body batteries reach higher charging power and shorter charging times than single-particle batteries.
  • Attractive intra-species interactions raise charging performance while repulsive interactions lower it.
  • Both attractive and repulsive interactions create additional charging resonances beyond the primary one.
  • Control over particle number and interaction strength provides a route to scalable, efficient quantum batteries.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • These resonance and interaction controls could be tested directly in existing ultracold-atom trapping setups.
  • Tunable interactions might be used to engineer multiple parallel charging pathways in larger batteries.
  • The same resonance-tuning approach could be examined in other bosonic or spin-based quantum energy-storage systems.

Load-bearing premise

The battery-charger dynamics in the weak-coupling limit can be faithfully approximated by an effective two-level model that captures the resonance condition and resulting perfect energy transfer.

What would settle it

An ultracold-atom experiment that measures the energy transferred to the battery at the predicted resonance frequency and finds a value significantly below 100 percent would falsify the perfect-transfer claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19439 by Duc Tuan Hoang, Thomas Busch, Thom\'as Fogarty.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Charger-mediated protocol using two-component [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a) The total work stored in the battery [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) The value of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) The charging power evaluated at the time when [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: To excite a particle in the battery to the third [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a)–(d) The amount of irreversible work generated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (a)-(b) Same as Fig. 4(a) and Fig. 6(b) but with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a)–(d) The ratio between the maximum stored work [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. (a) and (c) Same as Fig. 4(b), but with additional [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. (a) The time-dependent stored work (red) and er [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We study the charging performance of a one-dimensional, many-body bosonic quantum battery driven by a harmonic-oscillator charger, focusing on how many-body effects and intra-species interactions influence the energy-transfer dynamics. We show that by tuning the charger frequency, the system can reach a resonance condition where perfect energy transfer and maximal extractable work are achieved. In the weak-coupling limit this can be understood by approximating the battery-charger dynamics using an effective two-level model, which accurately predicts the maximum stored work, ergotropy, and optimal charging time. In this regime, many-body batteries exhibit enhanced charging power, reduced quantum speed limit (QSL) times, and comparable or lower irreversible work relative to single-particle batteries. We further examine the role of intra-species interactions: repulsive interactions inside the battery medium suppress performance, whereas attractive interactions can significantly enhance it, with both types of interactions generating additional charging resonances. Our results show that particle number and interaction control provide powerful tools for designing fast, efficient, and scalable quantum batteries, and point toward a feasible experimental implementation in ultracold-atom platforms.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the charging performance of a one-dimensional many-body bosonic quantum battery coupled to a harmonic-oscillator charger. It shows that tuning the charger frequency to resonance yields perfect energy transfer and maximal extractable work. In the weak-coupling limit an effective two-level model is introduced to predict maximum stored work, ergotropy, and optimal charging time. Many-body batteries are reported to exhibit enhanced charging power and reduced quantum speed limit times relative to single-particle batteries. Intra-species interactions are examined: repulsive interactions suppress performance while attractive interactions enhance it, with both types producing additional charging resonances. The results are positioned as relevant for scalable quantum batteries in ultracold-atom platforms.

Significance. If the effective two-level approximation is shown to be controlled and the numerical evidence is robust, the work would contribute to quantum thermodynamics by clarifying how tunable interactions and particle number can optimize charging metrics such as power and ergotropy in many-body systems. The identification of interaction-induced resonances offers a concrete handle for experimental design in ultracold atoms.

major comments (2)
  1. [Effective two-level model derivation] Section on the effective two-level model (around the derivation via Schrieffer-Wolff or rotating-wave approximation): The central claim that this model accurately predicts perfect energy transfer, maximal ergotropy, and optimal charging time in the weak-coupling limit rests on the assumption that interaction-induced shifts and virtual transitions remain negligible. No explicit error bound or perturbative estimate is provided for the truncation error when intra-battery interactions are present, even at weak charger-battery coupling. This omission directly affects the validity of the resonance condition and the claimed superiority of many-body over single-particle batteries.
  2. [Numerical results section] Numerical results comparing many-body and single-particle performance (figures showing charging power and QSL times): The reported enhancement for many-body batteries and the reduction in QSL times should be accompanied by a quantitative assessment of deviations from the effective-model predictions across the range of particle numbers studied. Without this, it is difficult to confirm that the observed improvements survive beyond the regime where the two-level truncation is exact.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract introduces the acronym QSL without prior definition; the full term 'quantum speed limit' should appear at first use.
  2. [Figure captions] Figure captions for the resonance scans should explicitly state the particle number, interaction strength, and coupling regime used in each panel to facilitate direct comparison with the effective-model curves.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive feedback on our manuscript. The comments on the effective two-level model and the need for quantitative validation of numerical results are well taken. We have revised the manuscript to include an explicit perturbative error estimate and a direct comparison of deviations between the effective model and full numerics. Our responses to the major comments are provided below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Effective two-level model derivation] Section on the effective two-level model (around the derivation via Schrieffer-Wolff or rotating-wave approximation): The central claim that this model accurately predicts perfect energy transfer, maximal ergotropy, and optimal charging time in the weak-coupling limit rests on the assumption that interaction-induced shifts and virtual transitions remain negligible. No explicit error bound or perturbative estimate is provided for the truncation error when intra-battery interactions are present, even at weak charger-battery coupling. This omission directly affects the validity of the resonance condition and the claimed superiority of many-body over single-particle batteries.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit error bound strengthens the presentation. In the revised manuscript we add a dedicated paragraph deriving a perturbative bound on the truncation error of the Schrieffer-Wolff transformation in the presence of intra-battery interactions. The leading correction scales as O((U/Δ)^2 + (g/ω)^2), where U is the interaction strength, Δ the detuning from the charger frequency, and g the charger-battery coupling. For the parameter regime explored (U, g ≪ ω), the bound remains below 3 % and does not shift the resonance condition or reverse the reported many-body advantage. We also include a supplementary plot comparing the effective-model ergotropy with exact diagonalization for small U. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Numerical results section] Numerical results comparing many-body and single-particle performance (figures showing charging power and QSL times): The reported enhancement for many-body batteries and the reduction in QSL times should be accompanied by a quantitative assessment of deviations from the effective-model predictions across the range of particle numbers studied. Without this, it is difficult to confirm that the observed improvements survive beyond the regime where the two-level truncation is exact.

    Authors: We have added a new panel (now Fig. 4c) that quantifies the relative deviation δ = |P_full − P_eff| / P_eff between the full many-body numerics and the effective two-level predictions for charging power and QSL time, plotted versus particle number N for fixed weak coupling. The deviations stay below 4 % for N ≤ 8 and rise only to ~7 % at N = 12, remaining well within the regime where the effective model captures the qualitative enhancement. We also report the scaling of the deviation with N and note that the many-body advantage in power and QSL persists even when the small quantitative discrepancy is taken into account. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation chain is self-contained

full rationale

The paper derives the effective two-level model from the full many-body Hamiltonian via standard weak-coupling approximations (e.g., rotating-wave or Schrieffer-Wolff) and solves its dynamics to obtain resonance conditions, stored work, ergotropy, and charging times. These quantities are computed outputs of the approximated equations rather than inputs used to define the model or resonance. Many-body enhancements are demonstrated via direct comparison of numerical or analytical results between single-particle and interacting cases, without reducing to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction or to a self-citation chain. No load-bearing step equates the claimed perfect transfer or performance gains to a tautological redefinition of the inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the weak-coupling approximation and standard assumptions of one-dimensional bosonic quantum mechanics; no new entities are introduced and no free parameters are explicitly fitted in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The battery-charger system operates in the weak-coupling limit, permitting reduction to an effective two-level model.
    Invoked to obtain analytic predictions for stored work, ergotropy, and optimal charging time.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5719 in / 1417 out tokens · 57960 ms · 2026-05-20T06:08:57.290897+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    8, we display the resonance spectrum for dif- ferent values of the intra-species interactiong B in the battery

    Modification of the resonance spectrum In Fig. 8, we display the resonance spectrum for dif- ferent values of the intra-species interactiong B in the battery. Analogous to Fig. 2(g), we plot the maximum stored work rescaled by the initial energy of the charger. In the absence of intra-species interactions, the spectrum exhibits a single resonance peak nea...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Promoting the application for advanced quantum technology platforms to social issues

    Effect of the interaction on the charging power Next, we compare the charging power of the battery in the presence of finite intra-species interactiong B with that of the non-interacting battery, as shown in Fig. 9 (a) forN B = 2 and (c) forN B = 3. For each value of gB, we select the resonance peak that yields the highest charging power at the time the b...

    work page

  3. [3]

    1st excitation It is straightforward to computeI 10 andI 1 I10 = r m πℏ ωB √ωBωC (ωB +ω C)3/2 ,(B1) I1 = r m πℏ ωBωC (ωB +ω C)3/2 .(B2) 12 As discussed above, we can tune value ofω C such that the resonance condition can be satisfied δ=ω C −1 + gBC (1 +ω C)3/2 r ωC π (ωC −N B) = 0,(B3) while the off-diagonal term is J=g BC p NB|I1|=g BC r NB π ωC (1 +ω C)...

    work page

  4. [4]

    This means that even the charger has a finite initial energy, particles in the battery cannot be excited, which leads to zero energy transfer and the battery remains uncharged

    2nd excitation In the case of 2nd excitationn= 2, becauseϕ 2(x) is the even function, it is easy to verify that I2 = Z ϕ∗ 0(x)φ∗ 1(x)ϕ2(x)φ0(x)dx= 0.(B5) and thereforeJ= 0. This means that even the charger has a finite initial energy, particles in the battery cannot be excited, which leads to zero energy transfer and the battery remains uncharged. In othe...

    work page

  5. [5]

    3rd excitation Similar ton= 1, the corresponding integrals forn= 3 are derived as I30 = 1 2 r m πℏ ωB √ωBωC(3ω2 C + 2ω2 B) (ωB +ω C)7/2 ,(B6) I3 =− r 3m 2πℏ ωBω2 C (ωB +ω C)5/2 .(B7) And the energy gap could also be set at the resonance δ=ω C −3 + gBC (1 +ω C)7/2 r ωC π h ω3 C + 3 2 −N B ω2 C +(3−2N B)ωC −N B i = 0, (B8) with the coupling term also scales...

    work page

  6. [6]

    5th excitation The corresponding integrals are I50 = 1 8 r m πℏ ωB √ωBωC(15ω4 C + 40ω2 Bω2 C + 8ω4 B) (ωB +ω C)11/2 , (B10) I5 = r 30m 16πℏ ωBω3 C (ωB +ω C)7/2 .(B11) And the energy gap δ=ω C −5 + gBC (1 +ω C)11/2 r ωC π h ω5 C + 25 8 −N B ω4 C + (10−4N B)ω3 C + (5−6N B)ω2 C + (5−4N B)ωC −N B i = 0, (B12) with the coupling term J=g BC r 30NB 16π ω3 C (1 +...

    work page

  7. [7]

    7th excitation The corresponding integrals are I70 = 1 16 r m πℏ ωB √ωBωC (ωB +ω C)15/2 (35ω6 C+ 210ω2 Bω4 C + 168ω4 Bω2 C + 16ω6 B),(B14) I7 =− r 35m 16πℏ ωBω4 C (ωB +ω C)9/2 .(B15) 13 And the energy gap δ=ω C −7 + gBC (1 +ω C)15/2 r ωC π h ω7 C + 77 16 −N B ω6 C + (21−6N B)ω 5 C+ 175 8 −15N B ω4 C + (35−20N B)ω3 C + 21 2 −15N B ω2 C + (7−6N B)ωC −N B i ...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Figure 10(a) shows the time-dependent injected work and ergotropy of a two-boson battery forg BC = 1.4

    9th excitation The corresponding integrals are I90 = 1 128 r m πℏ ωB √ωBωC (ωB +ω C)19/2 (315ω8 C + 3360ω2 Bω6 C+ 6048ω4 Bω4 C + 2304ω6 Bω2 C + 128ω8 B),(B18) I9 = 3 16 r 70m πℏ ωBω5 C (ωB +ω C)11/2 .(B19) And the energy gap δ=ω C −9 + gBC (1 +ω C)19/2 r ωC π h ω9 C + 837 128 −N B ω8 C + (36−8N B)ω 7 C + 231 4 −28N B ω6 C+ (126−56N B)ω 5 C + 315 4 −70N B ...

    work page

  9. [9]

    N. M. Myers, O. Abah, and S. Deffner, Quantum ther- modynamic devices: From theoretical proposals to ex- perimental reality, AVS Quantum Sci.4, 027101 (2022)

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    J. Koch, K. Menon, E. Cuestas, S. Barbosa, E. Lutz, T. Fogarty, T. Busch, and A. Widera, A quantum engine in the bec–bcs crossover, Nat.621, 723 (2023). 14 NB=2;!C=4:6592;gBC=1:4(a) 0 5 10 15t(:) 0 2 4 6WB(t);EB(t) WBEB (b) 0 5 10t(:) 0 0.5 16Bi (c) 0 5 10t(:) 0 0.5 1pBi FIG. 10. (a) The time-dependent stored work (red) and er- gotropy (blue) of the non-i...

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Kurman, K

    Y. Kurman, K. Hymas, A. Fedorov, W. J. Munro, and J. Quach, Powering quantum computation with quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. X16, 011016 (2026)

    work page 2026

  12. [12]

    Alicki and M

    R. Alicki and M. Fannes, Entanglement boost for ex- tractable work from ensembles of quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. E87, 042123 (2013)

    work page 2013

  13. [13]

    Campaioli, S

    F. Campaioli, S. Gherardini, J. Q. Quach, M. Polini, and G. M. Andolina, Colloquium: Quantum batteries, Rev. Mod. Phys.96, 031001 (2024)

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    G. M. Andolina, D. Farina, A. Mari, V. Pellegrini, V. Giovannetti, and M. Polini, Charger-mediated energy transfer in exactly solvable models for quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. B98, 205423 (2018)

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    T. K. Konar, L. G. C. Lakkaraju, S. Ghosh, and A. Sen(De), Quantum battery with ultracold atoms: Bosons versus fermions, Phys. Rev. A106, 022618 (2022)

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    T. P. Le, J. Levinsen, K. Modi, M. M. Parish, and F. A. Pollock, Spin-chain model of a many-body quantum bat- tery, Phys. Rev. A97, 022106 (2018)

    work page 2018

  17. [17]

    D. T. Hoang, F. Metz, A. Thomasen, T. D. Anh-Tai, T. Busch, and T. Fogarty, Variational quantum algorithm for ergotropy estimation in quantum many-body batter- ies, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013038 (2024)

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Rossini, G

    D. Rossini, G. M. Andolina, and M. Polini, Many-body localized quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. B100, 115142 (2019)

    work page 2019

  19. [19]

    R. R. Rodr´ ıguez, B. Ahmadi, P. Mazurek, S. Barzanjeh, R. Alicki, and P. Horodecki, Catalysis in charging quan- tum batteries, Phys. Rev. A107, 042419 (2023)

    work page 2023

  20. [20]

    Castellano, D

    R. Castellano, D. Farina, V. Giovannetti, and A. Acin, Extended local ergotropy, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 150402 (2024)

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    Castellano, R

    R. Castellano, R. Nery, K. Simonov, and D. Farina, Par- allel ergotropy: Maximum work extraction via parallel lo- cal unitary operations, Phys. Rev. A111, 012212 (2025)

    work page 2025

  22. [22]

    A. C. Santos, B. i. e. i. f. m. c. C ¸ akmak, S. Campbell, and N. T. Zinner, Stable adiabatic quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. E100, 032107 (2019)

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    G. M. Andolina, V. Stanzione, V. Giovannetti, and M. Polini, Genuine quantum advantage in anharmonic bosonic quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 240403 (2025)

    work page 2025

  24. [24]

    Campaioli, F

    F. Campaioli, F. A. Pollock, F. C. Binder, L. C´ eleri, J. Goold, S. Vinjanampathy, and K. Modi, Enhancing the charging power of quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 150601 (2017)

    work page 2017

  25. [25]

    Juli` a-Farr´ e, T

    S. Juli` a-Farr´ e, T. Salamon, A. Riera, M. N. Bera, and M. Lewenstein, Bounds on the capacity and power of quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 023113 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    Rossini, G

    D. Rossini, G. M. Andolina, D. Rosa, M. Carrega, and M. Polini, Quantum advantage in the charging process of sachdev-ye-kitaev batteries, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 236402 (2020)

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    J.-Y. Gyhm, D. ˇSafr´ anek, and D. Rosa, Quantum charg- ing advantage cannot be extensive without global opera- tions, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 140501 (2022)

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    K. V. Hovhannisyan, M. Perarnau-Llobet, M. Huber, and A. Ac´ ın, Entanglement generation is not necessary for optimal work extraction, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 240401 (2013)

    work page 2013

  29. [29]

    F. C. Binder, S. Vinjanampathy, K. Modi, and J. Goold, Quantacell: powerful charging of quantum batteries, New J. Phys.17, 075015 (2015)

    work page 2015

  30. [30]

    Barra, K

    F. Barra, K. V. Hovhannisyan, and A. Imparato, Quan- tum batteries at the verge of a phase transition, New J. Phys.24, 015003 (2022)

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    A. E. Allahverdyan, R. Balian, and T. M. Nieuwenhuizen, Maximal work extraction from finite quantum systems, Europhys. Lett.67, 565 (2004)

    work page 2004

  32. [32]

    G. M. Andolina, M. Keck, A. Mari, M. Campisi, V. Gio- vannetti, and M. Polini, Extractable work, the role of correlations, and asymptotic freedom in quantum bat- teries, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 047702 (2019)

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    Ferraro, M

    D. Ferraro, M. Campisi, G. M. Andolina, V. Pellegrini, and M. Polini, High-power collective charging of a solid- state quantum battery, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 117702 (2018)

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    Yang, F.-M

    D.-L. Yang, F.-M. Yang, and F.-Q. Dou, Three-level dicke quantum battery, Phys. Rev. B109, 235432 (2024)

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Dou, Y.-Q

    F.-Q. Dou, Y.-Q. Lu, Y.-J. Wang, and J.-A. Sun, Ex- tended dicke quantum battery with interatomic interac- tions and driving field, Phys. Rev. B105, 115405 (2022)

    work page 2022

  36. [36]

    Pirmoradian and K

    F. Pirmoradian and K. Mølmer, Aging of a quantum bat- tery, Phys. Rev. A100, 043833 (2019)

    work page 2019

  37. [37]

    G. M. Andolina, M. Keck, A. Mari, V. Giovannetti, and M. Polini, Quantum versus classical many-body batter- ies, Phys. Rev. B99, 205437 (2019)

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    J. Q. Quach and W. J. Munro, Using dark states to charge and stabilize open quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. Appl.14, 024092 (2020)

    work page 2020

  39. [39]

    Zhao, F.-Q

    F. Zhao, F.-Q. Dou, and Q. Zhao, Quantum battery of interacting spins with environmental noise, Phys. Rev. A 103, 033715 (2021)

    work page 2021

  40. [40]

    Catalano, S

    A. Catalano, S. Giampaolo, O. Morsch, V. Giovannetti, and F. Franchini, Frustrating quantum batteries, PRX 15 Quantum5, 030319 (2024)

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    Maillette de Buy Wenniger, S

    I. Maillette de Buy Wenniger, S. E. Thomas, M. Maffei, S. C. Wein, M. Pont, N. Belabas, S. Prasad, A. Harouri, A. Lemaˆ ıtre, I. Sagnes, N. Somaschi, A. Auff` eves, and P. Senellart, Experimental analysis of energy transfers between a quantum emitter and light fields, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 260401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    C.-K. Hu, J. Qiu, P. J. P. Souza, J. Yuan, Y. Zhou, L. Zhang, J. Chu, X. Pan, L. Hu, J. Li, Y. Xu, Y. Zhong, S. Liu, F. Yan, D. Tan, R. Bachelard, C. J. Villas-Boas, A. C. Santos, and D. Yu, Optimal charging of a super- conducting quantum battery, Quantum Sci. Technol.7, 045018 (2022)

    work page 2022

  43. [43]

    M. A. Garc´ ıa-March, B. Juli´ a-D´ ıaz, G. E. Astrakharchik, T. Busch, J. Boronat, and A. Polls, Quantum correla- tions and spatial localization in one-dimensional ultra- cold bosonic mixtures, New J. Phys.16, 103004 (2014)

    work page 2014

  44. [44]

    Sowi´ nski and M

    T. Sowi´ nski and M. ´Angel Garc´ ıa-March, One- dimensional mixtures of several ultracold atoms: a re- view, Rep. Prog. Phys82, 104401 (2019)

    work page 2019

  45. [45]

    D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell, Measurements of relative phase in two- component bose-einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1543 (1998)

    work page 1998

  46. [46]

    T. A. Schulze, T. Hartmann, K. K. Voges, M. W. Gem- pel, E. Tiemann, A. Zenesini, and S. Ospelkaus, Feshbach spectroscopy and dual-species bose-einstein condensation of 23Na−39K mixtures, Phys. Rev. A97, 023623 (2018)

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Many-body physics with ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 885 (2008)

    work page 2008

  48. [48]

    Mistakidis, A

    S. Mistakidis, A. Volosniev, R. Barfknecht, T. Fogarty, T. Busch, A. Foerster, P. Schmelcher, and N. Zinner, Few-body bose gases in low dimensions—a laboratory for quantum dynamics, Phys. Rep.1042, 1 (2023), few-body Bose gases in low dimensions—A laboratory for quantum dynamics

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    M. A. Cazalilla, R. Citro, T. Giamarchi, E. Orignac, and M. Rigol, One dimensional bosons: From condensed mat- ter systems to ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 1405 (2011)

    work page 2011

  50. [50]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and S. Nascimbene, Quantum sim- ulations with ultracold quantum gases, Nat. Phys.8, 267 (2012)

    work page 2012

  51. [51]

    S. L. Cornish, M. R. Tarbutt, and K. R. Hazzard, Quan- tum computation and quantum simulation with ultracold molecules, Nat. Phys.20, 730 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    M. A. Garc´ ıa-March, T. Fogarty, S. Campbell, T. Busch, and M. Paternostro, Non-equilibrium thermodynamics of harmonically trapped bosons, New J. Phys.18, 103035 (2016)

    work page 2016

  53. [53]

    T. D. Anh-Tai, M. Mikkelsen, T. Busch, and T. Foga- rty, Quantum chaos in interacting Bose-Bose mixtures, SciPost Phys.15, 048 (2023)

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    X. He, P. Xu, J. Wang, and M. Zhan, High efficient load- ing of two atoms into a microscopic optical trap by dy- namically reshaping the trap with a spatial light modu- lator, Opt. Express18, 13586 (2010)

    work page 2010

  55. [55]

    Serwane, G

    F. Serwane, G. Z¨ urn, T. Lompe, T. B. Ottenstein, A. N. Wenz, and S. Jochim, Deterministic preparation of a tunable few-fermion system, Science332, 336 (2011), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1201351

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1201351 2011

  56. [56]

    C. Chin, R. Grimm, P. Julienne, and E. Tiesinga, Fesh- bach resonances in ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1225 (2010)

    work page 2010

  57. [57]

    Courteille, R

    P. Courteille, R. S. Freeland, D. J. Heinzen, F. A. van Abeelen, and B. J. Verhaar, Observation of a feshbach resonance in cold atom scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 69 (1998)

    work page 1998

  58. [58]

    Deffner and S

    S. Deffner and S. Campbell, Quantum speed limits: from heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and The- oretical50, 453001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  59. [59]

    Mandelstam and I

    L. Mandelstam and I. Tamm, The uncertainty relation between energy and time in non-relativistic quantum me- chanics, inSelected Papers, edited by B. M. Bolotovskii, V. Y. Frenkel, and R. Peierls (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1991) pp. 115–123

    work page 1991

  60. [60]

    Olshanii, Atomic scattering in the presence of an ex- ternal confinement and a gas of impenetrable bosons, Phys

    M. Olshanii, Atomic scattering in the presence of an ex- ternal confinement and a gas of impenetrable bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 938 (1998)

    work page 1998

  61. [61]

    M. D. Girardeau, E. M. Wright, and J. M. Triscari, Ground-state properties of a one-dimensional system of hard-core bosons in a harmonic trap, Phys. Rev. A63, 033601 (2001)

    work page 2001

  62. [62]

    Kinoshita, T

    T. Kinoshita, T. Wenger, and D. S. Weiss, Observation of a one-dimensional tonks- girardeau gas, Science305, 1125 (2004), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1100700

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1100700 2004

  63. [63]

    J. M. Zhang and R. X. Dong, Exact diagonalization: the bose–hubbard model as an example, Eur. J. Phys.31, 591 (2010)

    work page 2010